Tag

HINDUTVA

Browsing

The following piece attempts to examine the roots of Hindutva ideology in India as well as the caste-class mobilisation on which it grows. In doing so, it will also look at the role of apolitical-centrist folks in fuelling fascism.

Fascism, as Time magazine describes it, is “a movement that promotes the idea of a forcibly monolithic, regimented nation under the control of an autocratic ruler.” Its origins can be traced to Europe in the early twentieth century, with Germany seeing one of the worst faces of that movement. However, after World War II, in 1945, fascism began to lose ground before resurfacing in the form of neo-fascism. However, fascism, unlike in the West, rose to prominence in India in the 1990s. Since then, fascism in India has grown to its worst, steadily choking the world’s greatest democracy to death.

In his paper titled ‘Neoliberalism and Fascism’, Prabhat Patnaik writes, “They (fascists leaders) invariably invoke acute hatred against some hapless minority groups, treating them as the ‘enemy within’ in a narrative of aggressive hyper nationalism, and attribute all the existing social ills of the ‘nation’ to the presence of such groups.” He goes on to explain in his research how these movements’ fundamental characteristics go beyond mere prejudice. It highlights the movement’s adherence to irrational viewpoints, desire for societal domination, and readiness to use violence openly—even in positions of governmental authority—in order to accomplish its goals. He describes the totalitarian tendencies of fascist governments as they attempt to dominate the social, political, and economic facets of society. This eventually leads to a highly controlled society in which the government has a significant influence over every element of an individual’s personal life.

Hindutva, also known as Hindu nationalism, is a fascist movement in India that advocates Hindu supremacy and the establishment of a Hindu Rashtra. This movement began in India in 1925, amid the fascist surge in the West, but received little attention from the public until the 1990s due to the dominance of a left-centrist political party in government. However, after the 1990s, the movement began to expand quickly, with the ‘Babri Masjid’ as the centre of the politicisation. The movement gained political traction with the formation of the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) in 1980, which was backed by the Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP).

Dr Muhammad Gumnāmi for The Muslim 500 notes, “From the 1990s onwards, the slow poisoning of Hindu minds against Indian Muslims was carried out by the RSS and BJP. However, their progress to a majority with complete control did not occur immediately. The BJP passed through a stage where they had to form a coalition government under the ‘moderate’ Vajpayee, who was also an RSS member. The Vajpayee coalition government ran between 1998 and 2004, and while it was BJP-led, it did not have the majority to lay the foundations of a Hindu Hitlerian state.”

In a country where caste is severely established, Hindu unity was a challenging feat. At the same time, in the 1990s, the then-V.P. Singh’s government implemented the Mandal Commission, which granted 27% reservation to the OBCs. This policy was a political manoeuvre intended to harm the BJP’s electoral base by creating inter-caste divides. While most political parties stayed mute on the commission since any favour may result in them losing a specific caste vote, the RSS officially called on the BJP to reject the Mandal Commission. But the party used a different strategy to mobilise people and secure voter support. A month later, L.K. Advani, the then-BJP President, began the ‘Rath Yatra’ to promote the agenda of a temple under the Babri Masjid and deflect attention away from the Mandal Commission. From the start, the Yatra provoked sectarian tensions between Hindus and Muslims.

On 6 December, 1992, members of Hindutva organisations razed the centuries-old mosque, sparking one of the bloodiest communal clashes in the country. While the Hindu-Muslim gap was gradually deepening following the demolition, a train accident made it worse. In 2002, a train coming from Ayodhya caught fire, killing 58 Hindu pilgrims. This prompted violent riots in Gujarat, killing over 1,000 individuals, the majority of whom were Muslims. Many international organisations criticised the BJP administration, stating evidence that the violence had been planned and designed in advance. The inability of the state to control violence, acts of silencing journalists and critics, and banning documentaries make further cause for concern and question. From then until now, the BJP has been successful in uniting Hindus on the basis of hatred against Muslims.

A PhD candidate from the Centre for Social Studies at the University of Coimbra writes, “In India, fascism is reinventing itself. It has crept through Hindu nationalism—Hindutva—and now poses a serious threat to Indian democracy.” For the BJP, mobilising UC Hindus was an easy task. A fairly easy equation: Hindu Raj means Hindu domination, which means upper caste dominance. Along with that equation came the Mandal Commission, which eventually helped them acquire UC voter support due to open criticism from the RSS, the parent wing. In a poll analysis by Lokniti-CSDS, they reported that as many as 89% of Brahmins, 87% of Rajputs, and 83% of Baniyas voted for the BJP in the 2022 elections. The percentage was 66 for OBCs and 41 for SCs.

While the existence of the UC voter base is self-explanatory, the question arises: how did the BJP succeed in mobilising the lower caste? Their first card featured Narendra Modi. Modi has been quite aggressive about his caste identity since the beginning. The Press Trust of India reported, “Addressing a press conference at the JD(U) headquarters here, the party’s MLC and chief spokesperson, Neeraj Kumar, pointed out that Modi has been accused of getting his caste, ‘Modh Ghanchi’, included in the OBC list in 2002, when he was the chief minister of Gujarat. ‘Modi sought to deny the allegation by claiming it was done way back in 1994, when the Congress ruled Gujarat as well as the Centre’, added the JD(U) leader. Kumar showed a sheet of paper claiming it was the Gazette of India of that year, mentioning the casts that were included among Other Backward Classes (OBC).” A few other political groups also questioned his caste status, but the BJP successfully defended it by labelling the claims “casteist”.

Now the question remains: even after an increase in crime rates against Dalits since 2013, why are Dalits voting for the BJP? The answer lies in the class development of this caste. In the book ‘Maya Modi Azad: Dalit Politics in the Time of Hindutva,’ scholars Sudha Pai and Sajjan Kumar find out the reason behind this shift. The book explains how class upliftment is one of the reasons behind the shift in political support. Vikas Patnaik notes in his review of the book for The Hindu, “Indeed, this is one of the finest insights of the book. One sign of self-confidence is always fragmentation, as an individual or a sub-group agency begins to question the need for a larger ‘authentic’ self. Just as a Brahmin can be a supporter of the BJP, the Congress, or even a socialist, it goes without saying that a confident Dalit middle class will also articulate itself in fragments. In other words, the electoral debacle of the BSP also reflects the success of the BSP in providing ‘aatma-samman’ (self-respect) to Dalits who grew up seeing Kanshi Ram and Mayawati as their natural leaders.”

Another reason is the hierarchy within castes. An excerpt from Pai and Kumar’s book argues, “It is also because the objective has been two-fold: to obtain the electoral support required in a key state like UP and include them within the saffron fold in order to build a Hindu Rashtra. Feeling neglected within the BSP vis-à-vis the dominant Jatavs, the smaller Dalit sub-castes have been attracted to the BJP and thus rendered vulnerable to its mobilizational strategies.”

The BJP’s silence on the Mandal Commission, the addition of EWS reservation, RSS’ criticism of the Mandal Commission, weakening opposition, intra-caste dominance, and Modi’s identity were all enough to mobilise the communities and bring them under the banner of “Hindu,” with a common slogan, “Not a ‘Brahmin’, Not a ‘Kshatriya’, Not a ‘Vaishya’, Not a ‘Shudra’: We are Hindus.”

While the underprivileged lack access to proper education and information about issues, they vote with the hope that this can probably uplift their financial status, while the rich ensure that they stay ignorant and vote with hatred. As economist Prabhat Patnaik states, “Fascism has been thriving on weakening the working class across the world,” and indeed the present construction workers deal between India and Israel exemplifies that. In India, the BJP government’s control over media and internet platforms aids in mobilising the middle and upper classes. According to a recent World Economic Forum survey, India is the most vulnerable to misinformation and disinformation in the world, posing the greatest threat to the 2024 elections. The reason a lie becomes a fact in India is because the privileged either benefit from it or turn a blind eye to it.

Fascism thrives on the politicisation of religion, and misinformation to blur the distinction between political and religious events aids in the cultivation of an apolitical voter base that ignores socio-political issues. Such a voter base indirectly aids in mobilising the working class. A recent illustration of this is the violence that erupted in the country following the Ram Temple’s inauguration. While this voting base had the resources and access to education, they chose to remain in their bubble of privilege, thereby supporting the authoritarian regime and creating a religious gap in their personal relationships.

Furthermore, an analysis of how apolitical-centrist individuals unknowingly support fascism emphasises the importance of a nuanced understanding of political apathy and the potential consequences of being untouched by ideological shifts. The development of fascism highlights the importance of ideological neutrality in deciding a country’s political direction.

So, while we sit in our bubble of privilege, continue to preach hatred, directly or indirectly, and refuse to question the hatred, the regime will continue to divide everyone, incite riots, and fan the flame of hatred towards our doors.

Read also: “I am a Brahmin” The Casteism of Baba Ramdev and Shankaracharya

Featured Image Credits: Hindustan Times

Dhruv Bhati
[email protected]

Under the guise of the Bharat Literature Festival (BLF), there is a discernible attempt to spread Hindutva ideology in academics and on campus. With declining academic freedom, BLF appears to be a facet of the regime’s wider effort to systematically alter academic discourse and the college environment.

On November 28th and 29th, 2023, Kirori Mal College (KMC) hosted the Bharat Literature Festival (BLF), which drew severe criticism from college students. BLF, which “intends to connect the learnings of the complicated past with the hope & aspirations of a fascinating future,” organised its Litfest in partnership with KMC. Various renowned authors and journalists were invited for the discussions. However, the event drew more criticism as its itinerary was released, which included discussions regarding RSS and Hindutva. “Pranam Main Hindu Hun: Exploring Inner Hindutva in Popular Culture”, “Sanghe Shakti: Bharat @2047”, “Indian Continent in the Era of Prime Minister Narendra Modi”, etc. were among the topics discussed. Not only the topics, but several of the invited speakers openly support the regime and have called for the genocide of Muslims in the past. 

When viewed in the context of the government’s increasing influence on academic structures, courses, academic discourses, and crackdown on academicians critical of the government, such discussions and events in a central university college with the college as co-organisers highlight how BLF is not just a litfest but a part of a broader movement seeking to assert and disseminate Hindutva principles within the realms of academics.

The Academic Freedom Index (AFI) report, published by the Global Public Policy Institute, placed India in the bottom 30% of 179 countries in 2022, with a score of 0.38 out of 1. Down to Earth extracted the Academic Freedom Score of India and found out that, “The country’s freedom index score was high in the past, ranging from 0.60-0.70 between 1950 and 2012, except from 1974-1978, data showed.” The AFI report reads, “Around 2013, all aspects of academic freedom began to decline strongly, reinforced with Narendra Modi’s election as Prime Minister in 2014.”

TW// Mention of suicide

The suicide of Rohit Vermula, the arrest of Umar Khalid, Natasha Narwal, and many other students under UAPA for participating in anti-CAA protests, the increasing crackdown on Kashmiri students, and the recent controversy over a research paper by an Ashoka University professor titled ‘Democratic Backsliding in the World’s Largest Democracy’, which alleged voter suppression to favour Modi in the 2019 election, all highlight the country’s deteriorating academic freedom. 

All of this, when reviewed in the context of NEP and CUET implementation, points to a more concerning scenario. With the adoption of CUET, student population diversity has decreased, with the majority of students being affluent ‘apolitical’ CBSE students from the North Belt. This apolitical student group fails to understand and acknowledge the hidden politics behind these events, and they fall into the trap that gradually shapes their way of thinking in the direction the regime wants. 

On the condition of anonymity, a third-year KMC student stated, “A lot of my friends and classmates were there, posting stories about BLF.” They are the same folks that will go and discuss casteism, patriarchy, and Islamophobia in their events and discussions. This set of students only wants to talk about these topics in order to feel good about themselves and fall into the category of ‘Progressive Liberal DU Student,’ while failing to understand the real-life ramifications and implementations of the same.”  

In a message circulated in Whatsapp groups, the principal wrote, “During the event, I expect you to (i) Be very disciplined and well behaved, (ii) Be appropriately well dressed according to the theme of the festival…Please note that there is no change in the teaching schedule of the college.” In contrast, students reported disruptions and class cancellations as a result of classrooms being converted into visitor rest areas. A volunteer from the BFL organising committee spoke about the threats posed by the conveners of their college societies. A person said, “We had pressure from the administration, who threatened us. The context for that is hard to explain, but we are being heavily monitored.” 

Another thing to notice here is the indirect imposition of Hindi throughout the event. The majority of the discussion titles were in Hindi, and there was no representation of North-East and South Indian literature at the event. Not just the language, but even the titles, were linked to the regime’s policies and marketing strategies. “Mann ki Baat: Confluence of Policy and Communication in New India” and “Namami Gange” are a few examples.

While all of these are sufficient to understand that the BLF is more than simply a litfest, it also serves as a means of spreading Hindutva ideology and BJP politics. Events like these, as well as the government’s growing control over academics, limit academic freedom, further eroding it. The AFI report explains, “Pressure on institutional autonomy and campus integrity combined with constraints on academics’ freedom of expression is what distinguished India from other countries’ scores on the index. The attacks on academic freedom under Modi’s Hindu nationalist government were also possible due to the absence of a legal framework to protect academic freedom.” The report’s authors further called on higher education policymakers, university leaders, and research funders to promote academic freedom in their own academic institutions as well as abroad.” But until then, the only ways to tackle religious politics and prevent them from impacting colleges and universities are through critical study of such events, self-education, and civil disobedience.

Read Also: The Fear of Being Identified

Featured Image Credits: KMC Instagram Page(@kmcollegedelhi)

DU Beat

 

In an unforeseen turn of events, Bhupendra Tomar, leader of ‘Hindu Raksha Dal’, a right-wing organisation claimed responsibility for the attacks on the teachers and students of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) in Delhi on the 5th January 2019.

 Bhupendra Tomar, leader of Hindu Raksha Dal, a right-leaning organisation claimed responsibility for the attacks on the teachers and students of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) in Delhi on the 5th January 2019 through admission in a video.

The video surfaced on the internet after being posted by a Twitter user where Tomar, popularly known as Pinki Bhaiya blamed the university for being a hotbed of “Anti-National” and “Anti-Hindu” activities.

Bhupendra Tomar, said in the video, “We take full responsibility for the attack in JNU and would like to say that they were our workers. The way these people have been behaving over the years, especially the people in JNU, it is against our religion. We can never tolerate such anti-national activities,”.

According to the ANI report on the issue, Government sources have informed that the claims made by Pinky Chaudhary (Popular name for Bhupendra Tomar) are under investigation. The sources also informed that the Delhi Police is using CCTV footage and facial recognition to identify the masked men and women.

He also added, “These people live in our country, eat here, study here and indulge in anti-national activities. Hindu Raksha Dal will never tolerate this and again attack whoever tries such ideals.”

He with much pride also confirmed the party’s ideology to engage in further violence in the name of nationalism.

Affirming to that, Pinky Chaudhary said, “If in future others indulge in similar anti-national activities, we will again carry out a similar action in those universities. We take responsibility to carry out these actions.”

The gruesome display of violence that the students and teachers of JNU endured where more than thirty people were injured along with tremendous property damage by the people, who were seen carrying around sticks and rods has succumbed to this video.

JNU Students’ Union (JNUSU) president Aishe Ghosh was also injured in the incident and was rushed to AIIMS along with the other injured people. All of them were discharged on Monday.

This incident raises major questions about the safety of the students on campus. However, both JNU Students’ Union (JNUSU) and Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) have blamed each other for the violence.

Feature Image Credits: ANI

Khush Vardhan Dembla

[email protected]

A look at how Gandhi shaped our nation, along with the parts of his character not discussed popularly.

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi or Mahatma Gandhi is popularly remembered as the Father of the Nation. He was one of the leaders at the forefront of the Indian freedom struggle, and has a significant role in the attainment of Indian Independence. These are few of the lines we have been told throughout our lives as children – on the 2nd
October every year, on Independence days, and through our History and Political Science textbooks. This is true for the most part and Gandhi’s return from South Africa did
provide a much-needed boost to the freedom struggle. His work with the downtrodden, and his ideas of non-violence still hold a prominent place in the society today.
However, due to the nature of his death, many of Gandhi’s idiosyncrasies and frailties are ignored when it comes to mainstream dialogue. He is considered to be a man beyond wrongdoing, to be the definition of moral standards, and everything we have been taught all our lives just adds to that line of the narrative. The book Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and His Struggle with India by Joseph Lelyveld was banned in his home-state of Gujarat when it came out in 2011.

This is interesting because the book does not break any new ground as such, and still speaks glowingly of Gandhi. Although, it does contain the description of some negative aspects and flaws in the great man’s character.
The banning of this book simply shows how the Indian population cannot withstand any attack in any form on those who they deify as gods.

There are many aspects to Gandhi’s character that should be questioned, because it is through the crevices in popularised and validated ideologies that people find the scope to improve society and, by extrapolation, the world.

One of these aspects showcases that Gandhi was a racist for most of his adult life, especially while working on civil rights in South Africa. His work centered on giving Indians more power and rights, as compared to the local natives who he felt were “inferior”. Gandhi wrote to Adolf Hitler twice in 1939 and 1940,and while it was to call for peace, he did write the following- “…nor do we believe you are the monster described by your opponents”.
Sexually, Gandhi had maintained a vow of celibacy; however, according to Lelyveld’s and Jad Adams’ Gandhi: Naked Ambition, it was said that he maintained close and intimate contact with females, making teenagers, women, and allegedly even his own grandniece sleep naked with him
to test his vow of celibacy. He was incredibly sexist and homophobic, propagating the belief that women should be responsible for the sexual assaults they face. He justified honour killings, labelled women who used
contraceptives as “whores”, and once chopped off the hair of two female followers who were being harassed so that the perpetrators would stop. He also led a campaign to have all traces of homoerotic tradition removed from Hindu temples as part of a “sexual cleansing” initiative.
Gandhi might have been the reason that India is still an ideologically backward, and sexually repressed nation. However, it is no justification for the current narrative propagated by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and the extremist right-wing labelling Nathuram Godse, Gandhi’s killer, as a hero. The incident involving Pragya Thakur serves as a recent example to this belief. The rise of Hindutva under the extreme right has led to many such people being given a status that
they do not deserve.
To conclude, here is the statement by a student from the University
of Delhi, who does not wish to be named, “I know Gandhi did a lot of messed up things, but how can anyone even think (that) celebrating his killer is good? He still helped our freedom struggle; the celebration of his death because he worked to help the Muslim minority just shows the rising intolerance in our country.”

Feature Image Credits: DU Beat Archives.

Prabhanu Kumar Das
[email protected] 

The University of Delhi (DU) saw controversy
unfold over Savarkar, from demands to
rename the Delhi University Students’ Union
(DUSU) Office after V.D. Savarkar, to the
installation of a pillar with his bust, along
with those of Subhas Chandra Bose and
Bhagat Singh in the campus. The ideological
warfare about his thoughts continues to be
controversial.

As the DUSU elections approach, the
University is grappling with the Savarkar
Statue Controversy. The illegal installation
of the bust, followed by its removal,
reveals the ideological tussle between the
different schools of thought.
An extremist in his thoughts, Savarkar
was an Indian Independence activist who
rebelled against the British rule through
revolutionary means, and was imprisoned
due to his anti-coloniser activities.
Following a failed attempt to escape
while being transported from Marseilles
in France, he was sentenced to two life
terms of imprisonment, and eventually
landed in the cellular jail or Kala Pani.
Savarkar has been always been at the
eye of the storm, for being viewed as a
“coward” since he wrote letters to the
British, pleading to be released from the
torture of the cellular jail.
Being an atheist, he believed that
Hinduism was a political identity having
a powerful moral force. While in prison,
Savarkar wrote the work describing
Hindutva in which he defined that all
people descended from Hindu culture
as being a part of Hindutva, including
Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs. The noted
journalist, Manu Joseph, recently opined,
“The erasure of Savarkar by intellectuals
1.0 was so complete that at the end of it
all, he was not even a villain. He was not
mentioned in textbooks even as one of the
accused in the assassination of Mahatma
Gandhi. Savarkar’s insight was that
Hinduism was a powerful political identity
that does not require gods, or even the
cow actually, whom he did not love very
much, and that Hinduism is a fundamental
genetic force in all Indians. In this way, he
invented Hindutva.”
The very fact that the revolutionary
ideas of Savarkar remain to be missing
from our mainstream reading and
textbooks, does not allow the discussion
on his extreme views in the freedom
struggle movement through Hindutva.
Vaibhav Purandare, in his book The True
Story of the Father of Hindutva reveals
Savarkar’s professed hatred for Muslims.
In his early years as a revolutionary,
Savarkar asked Hindus and Muslims to
get along, but eventually, he wished to
subdue Muslims.
Earlier this month, on 12th August, the
Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP)
demanded the DUSU Office be named
after Veer Savarkar. Following this, the
ABVP and DUSU installed the busts of
V.D. Savarkar, Subhas Chandra Bose,
and Bhagat Singh outside the Faculty
of Arts in the North Campus and faced
criticism, followed by the attack on the
statue and smearing black colour on
the bust by the National Students’
Union of India.
Shakti Singh, the outgoing President
of DUSU, said, “Since the beginning
of my term, I was requesting the DU
administration for establishing the statues
but never got a reply from them. The
left-wing forces and the Congress party
have always defamed Veer Savarkar.
So, I wanted that this issue should be
debated so that the youth can know about
his contribution to the freedom struggle
of the country.”
Madhu Prasad, former Professor of
Philosophy, Zakir Hussain College said,
“Bhagat Singh believed that the country
won’t get freedom unless there is equality.
However, the current scenario in this
country does not allow debate, discussion,
and dissent, and idolising Savarkar is
against the essence of freedom.”
While he worked upon reforming
and revolting the colonial rule, his
extreme positions on Gandhi, Hindu
Rashtra, and Muslims bestows him with
political exclusion.

Feature Image Credits: Prateek Pankaj for DU Beat

Sriya Rane

[email protected]